[1] “The” as here used indeed practically = “these,” so that, by our analysis, such a judgment has no claim to rank as a universal judgment It is difficult to find a plainly collective judgment which has not some affinity to judgment with demonstrative pronoun or proper name. A judgment in which “All M.P.’s” stands as subject, has affinity with the latter. (2) The nature of the Universal Judgment is not examined with a view to the distinction between Categorical and Hypothetical. The common Logic does not go behind the grammatical form, which on this point is not decisive. (iv.) The Hypothetical Judgment [1] is said to consist of two categorical propositions, or to be “_complex_” But of course it is a simple judgment, _prima facie_ expressing a relation of reason and consequent. Its parts are not Judgments, for they are not such as to stand alone. [1] Bain, p. 85; Jevons, p. 160. (v.) The Disjunctive Judgment is often (_e.g._ by Mill and Bain) said to be equivalent to two Hypothetical Judgments. The strange thing is that both of these writers take the wrong two. [1] If we allow conversion of a Hypothetical Judgment two are enough, but of course they must be the two which cannot be got from each other by conversion, viz. the two beginning, “If A is B ...” and “If A is not B ...” respectively. If we do not admit conversion we must have all four. Let the disjunction be, “This signal light is either red or green.” In order to know this we must know not {116} only that, “If it is red it is not green” (with its equivalent, “If it is green it is not red”), but that, “If it is not red it is green” (with its equivalent, “If it is not green it is red”). The former by itself leaves open the possibility that it may be not red or green, but blue or yellow; the latter by itself the possibility that when it is red it may also at the same time be green. The former secures that the two terms exclude each other; the latter, that, taken together, they exclude all other predicates. [1] Mill, ch. iv.; Bain, p. 86. In any case, the disjunctive is more than any combination of Hypotheticals, and really tends to be Categorical, and ought not to be claimed as Conditional. _Which are Categorical?_ 2. We will now look at these Judgments in order, consider their real meaning, and also ascertain the limits of the Categorical Judgment, viz. that which affirms the existence of its Subject, or in other words, asserts a fact. _The Particular Judgment_ (i) The Particular Judgment of common Logic, “Some S. is P.,” has different meanings according as it is understood naturally, or tied down to be a result of enumeration. In any case it is an imperfect, unscientific Judgment, in which the mind cannot rest, because it has an undefined limitation imposed upon the Subject. _Its natural meaning_